Treasongate: Treachery by the Washington Post

by **chiggerbit** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:14 am

I find it interesting to go back and compare Iran/Contra to ths circus that is going on today. Here's one little nugget: <a href="http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/BushGhosts.html">www.ratical.org/ratville/...hosts.html</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Pure vindictiveness may explain some of the Carlyle Group senior adviser's lust to see the young Taliboy's neck in a noose. More likely, Poppy Bush is angry that his son, President W., is being confronted by a nemesis from his own dark Iran-Contra past: James Brosnahan. James Brosnahan, former federal prosecutor and former member of the Lawrence Walsh Independent Counsel team, is John Walker Lindh's attorney. Recall that the elder Bush hated no one on earth more than Walsh. In his book Shadow, Bob Woodward describes how, during the height of the Walsh inquiry, Bush received a "Lawrence Walsh" doll as a gag Christmas gift from a member of his staff. Bush slammed the doll repeatedly against his desk, shouting, "Take that, Walsh!"<hr></blockquote>

by **Watchful Citizen** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:54 am

(I'm surprised to read in this 1999 Webb speech his description of how the corporate press refused to cover IranContra and even tells a Robert Parry story about getting the word to shut up at a Washington dinner party with the CIA director and generals ignoring IranContra. I'm not surprised at the CIA-run military media. I'm surprised that Webb didn't get that Operation Mockingbird (revealed in 1975 Senate Hearings on CIA Abuses) was shutting down his career for exposing the IranContra cocaine smuggling by CIA. What was Webb thinking?) <a href="http://www.parascope.com/mx/articles/garywebb/garyWebbSpeaks.htm">www.parascope.com/mx/arti...Speaks.htm</a> >snip< I think the Iran-contra scandal was worse than Watergate, far worse than this nonsense we're doing now. But I'll tell you, I think the press played a very big part in downplaying that scandal. One of the people I interviewed for the book was a woman named Pam Naughton, who was one of the best prosecutors that the Iran-contra committee had. And I asked her, why -- you know, it was also the first scandal that was televised, and I remember watching them at night. I would go to work and I'd set the VCR, and I'd come home at night and I'd watch the hearings. Then I'd pick up the paper the next morning, and it was completely different! And I couldn't figure it out, and this has bothered me all these years. So when I got Pam Naughton on the phone, I said, what the hell happened to the press corps in Washington during the Iran-contra scandal? And she said, well, I can tell you what I saw. She said, every day, we would come out at the start of this hearings, and we would lay out a stack of documents -- all the exhibits we were going to introduce -- stuff that she thought was extremely incriminating, front page story after front page story, and they'd sit them on a table. And she said, every day the press corps would come in, and they'd say hi, how're you doing, blah blah blah, and they'd go sit down in the front row and start talking about, you know, did you see the ball game last night, and what they saw on Johnny Carson. And she said one or two reporters would go up and get their stack of documents and go back and write about it, and everybody else sat in the front row, and they would sit and say, okay, what's our story today? And they would all agree what the story was, and they'd go back and write it. Most of them never even looked at the exhibits. Gary Webb photo And that's why I say it was the press's fault, because there was so much stuff that came out of those hearings. That used to just drive me crazy, you would never see it in the newspaper. And I don't think it's a conspiracy -- if anything, it's a conspiracy of stupidity and laziness. I talked to Bob Parry about this -- when he was working for Newsweek covering Iran-contra, they weren't even letting him go to the hearings. He had to get transcripts messengered to him at his house secretly, so his editors wouldn't find out he was actually reading the transcripts, because he was writing stories that were so different from everybody else's. Bob Parry tells a story of being at a dinner party with Bobby Inman from the CIA, the editor of Newsweek, and all the muckity-mucks -- this was his big introduction into Washington society. And they were sitting at the dinner table in the midst of the Iran-contra thing, talking about everything but Iran-contra. And Bob said he had the bad taste of bringing up the Iran-contra hearing and mentioning one particularly bad aspect of it. And he said, the editor of Newsweek looked at him and said, "You know, Bob, there are just some things that it's better the country just doesn't know about." And all these admirals and generals sitting around the table all nodded their heads in agreement, and they wanted to talk about something else. That's the attitude. That's the attitude in Washington. And that's the attitude of the Washington press corps, and nowadays it's even worse than that, because now, if you play the game right, you get a TV show. Now you've got the McLaughlin Group. Now you get your mug on CNN. You know. And that's how they keep them in line. If you're a rabble rouser, and a shit-stirrer, they don't want your type on television. They want the pundits. The other question was about the Christic Institute. They had it all figured out. The Christic Institute had this thing figured out. They filed suit in May of 1986, alleging that the Reagan administration, the CIA, this sort of parallel government was going on. Oliver North was involved in it, you had the Bay of Pigs Cubans that were involved in it down in Costa Rica, they had names, they had dates, and they got murdered. And the Reagan administration's line was, they're a bunch of left-wing liberal crazies, this was conspiracy theory. If you want to see what they really thought, go to Oliver North's diaries, which are public -- the National Security Archive has got them -- all he was writing about, after the Christic Institute's suit was filed, was how we've got to shut this thing down, how we have to discredit these witnesses, how we've got to get this guy set up, how we've got to get this guy out of the country... They knew that the Christic Institute was right, and they were deathly afraid that the American public was going to find out about it. I am convinced that the judge who was hearing the case was part and parcel to the problem. He threw the case out of court and fined the Christic Institute, I think it was $1.3 million, for even bringing the lawsuit. It was deemed "frivolous litigation." And it finally bankrupted them. And they went away. But that's the problem when you try to take on the government in its own arena, and the federal courts are definitely part of its own arena. They make the rules. And in cases like that, you don't stand a chance in hell, it won't happen. Voice From the Audience: But if you cannot get the truth in the courts, if you cannot write it in the papers, then what do you do? Gary Webb: You do it yourself. You do it yourself. You've got to start rebuilding an information system on your own. And that's what's going on. It's very small, but it's happening. People are talking to each other through newsgroups on the Internet. People are doing Internet newsletters. >snip<

by **Peachtree Pam** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:14 am

CS's latest: <a href="http://www.citizenspook.blogspot.com/">www.citizenspook.blogspot.com/</a>

by **chiggerbit** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:07 pm

CIA "operatives" ARE covert. Analysts are not. There was much discussion of Novak's use of that word when this all started. Novak used the specific word "operative", then later when confronted with its use,tried to excuse himself, saying he was too unsophisticated to know that that is what it meant, Yeah, right. All experienced media people know that, including Novak and Corn. Even I, a Barney Fife-type, knew it. I would think cs would know it, too.

by **dbeach** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:50 pm

<a href="http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/fund.htm">www.rense.com/1.imagesH/fund.htm</a> THANX PAM for CS alert maybe post it in separate thread?? The left gatekeepers is at rense..whomever posted that knew something about corn and mockingbird Operation mockingbird is in full view..from miller to corn to novak TRAITORS

by **Peachtree Pam** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:28 pm

Hi dbeach, I printed out the entire post under watergate-level event thread. I'm going to do that for all his posts since they are hacking him again as you see under CS's thread. But it is now back up. Shows they are watching. Pam

by **john darmy** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:17 pm

Having worked for daily newspapers for more than 20 years, I can tell you that the extent of infiltration by the CIA is absolutely mind-boggling. I first discovered this in the early '90s when I was working at a daily newspaper in Indiana. In the months leading up to the release of the Oliver Stone film "JFK," we published a number of articles and columns attacking the film. And that was BEFORE the film had even been released! Two of the columns I remember were written by Carl Rowan and Ellen Goodman. Well, as a longtime "conspiracy buff," I took great offense at these groundless attacks, so I asked if I could write a rebuttal. To my amazement, they let me. Basically, I wrote that all these attacks are not based on the facts, and that if people would watch the film with an open mind, they would discover that there is plenty of evidence for a conspiracy. And I suggested that after viewing the film, they should read some of the books on which it was based, including "Crossfire" by Jim Marrs and "On the Trail of the Assassins" by Jim Garrison. Not a single person on the newspaper staff had anything nice to say about my editorial. Plenty of them insulted me, however. I remember one guy saying to me, "What are you now, a movie critic?" I replied, "No, a dishonesty critic." Anyway, my career went downhill from there, so eventually I stopped writing about corruption in government. I had a family to support. But I was placed under surveillance, and ever since last year, I have been subjected to gang stalking and electronic harassment. See stopcovertwar.com, eharassment.ca and sosbeevfbi.com. Many, many activists and whistleblowers throughout the world are being targeted by this project right now. Basically, we are all target practice for the New World Order. I was working at another daily newspaper when this harassment came down on me last year, and I couldn't believe how many people at the newspaper participated in the harassment. People who I thought were my friends suddenly started treating me like shit when this all came down on me, so I had no choice but to conclude that they were complicit. I finally quit my job after the harassment became intolerable, and since that time, I have been blacklisted in the industry. I did manage to get an interview at a daily newspaper, but I think it was just to teach me a lesson. I was zapped with directed energy weapons WHILE I WAS INSIDE the newspaper office. After the "interview," the "editor" told me some story about how someone had once accused her of being a "CIA operative." Then she laughed. So keep this in mind when you read your daily newspaper, if any of you still do. It is being "edited" by people whose primary loyalty is to the national security state.

by **chiggerbit** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:36 pm

Amusing, in hindsight. Some interesting snippets here, too. <a href="http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2003/10/01/168398.html">www.townhall.com/opinion/...68398.html</a> The CIA leak Oct 1, 2003 by Robert Novak WASHINGTON -- I had thought I never again would write about retired diplomat Joseph Wilson's CIA-employee wife, but feel constrained to do so now that repercussions of my July 14 column have reached the front pages of major newspapers and led off network news broadcasts. My role and the role of the Bush White House have been distorted and need explanation. The leak now under Justice Department investigation is described by former Ambassador Wilson and critics of President Bush's Iraq policy as a reprehensible effort to silence them. To protect my own integrity and credibility, I would like to stress three points. First, I did not receive a planned leak. Second, the CIA never warned me that the disclosure of Wilson's wife working at the agency would endanger her or anybody else. Third, it was not much of a secret. The current Justice investigation stems from a routine, mandated probe of all CIA leaks, but follows weeks of agitation. Wilson, after telling me in July that he would say nothing about his wife, has made investigation of the leak his life's work -- aided by the relentless Sen. Charles Schumer of New York. These efforts cannot be separated from the massive political assault on President Bush. This story began July 6 when Wilson went public and identified himself as the retired diplomat who had reported negatively to the CIA in 2002 on alleged Iraq efforts to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger. I was curious why a high-ranking official in President Bill Clinton's National Security Council (NSC) was given this assignment. Wilson had become a vocal opponent of President Bush's policies in Iraq after contributing to Al Gore in the last election cycle and John Kerry in this one. During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife. It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger. When I called another official for confirmation, he said: "Oh, you know about it." The published report that somebody in the White House failed to plant this story with six reporters and finally found me as a willing pawn is simply untrue.At the CIA, the official designated to talk to me denied that Wilson's wife had inspired his selection but said she was delegated to request his help. He asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause "difficulties" if she travels abroad. He never suggested to me that Wilson's wife or anybody else would be endangered. If he had, I would not have used her name. I used it in the sixth paragraph of my column because it looked like the missing explanation of an otherwise incredible choice by the CIA for its mission. How big a secret was it? It was well known around Washington that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. Republican activist Clifford May wrote Monday, in National Review Online, that he had been told of her identity by a non-government source before my column appeared and that it was common knowledge. Her name, Valerie Plame, was no secret either, appearing in Wilson's "Who's Who in America" entry. A big question is her duties at Langley. I regret that I referred to her in my column as an "operative," a word I have lavished on hack politicians for more than 40 years. While the CIA refuses to publicly define her status, the official contact says she is "covered" -- working under the guise of another agency. However, an unofficial source at the Agency says she has been an analyst, not in covert operations. The Justice Department investigation was not requested by CIA Director George Tenet. Any leak of classified information is routinely passed by the Agency to Justice, averaging one a week. This investigative request was made in July shortly after the column was published. Reported only last weekend, the request ignited anti-Bush furor.

by **chiggerbit** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:37 pm

Seems to me Fitzy should interview Clifford May.

by **anonymous** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:01 pm

Found this item recently. Might be of interest to people persuing the theory that the Wilsons were in on the outing. Posted at 07:40 AM ET, 07/14/2005 Obligatory Karl Rove Item [Yesterday I tried to post this item about Karl Rove, but the blogging tool went haywire. I'm going to try again, DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT IS NOT LOCAL NEWS. Actually I guess it is local news if you consider that Rove lives and works here. In fact he lives in my neighborhood. So do the Wilsons. Rove and the Wilsons attend the same church. Even more important, we all shop at the same wine store. We bond over Bordeaux.] <a href="http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/achenblog/2005/07/obligatory_karl.html">blogs.washingtonpost.com/..._karl.html</a> --- The Plame-Rove church connection is also mentioned in the documentary / book Bush's Brain. Cheers

by **antiaristo** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:23 pm

very interesting,anon Two things happened last week where this may have some relevance. Remember Rove was said to have thrown something out at the last moment, and so avoided indictment? Remember those FBI agents going around at the last minute talking to the Wilson's neighbours? I wonder.....

Treasongate: Treachery by the Washington Post

Re: scootiegate

Gary Webb tells of press inaction during IranContra.

Cross-posting

Re: Cross-posting

Re: Cross-posting

CS latest post

mockingbird

Re: mockingbird

Re: mockingbird

Plame-Rove church connection

Re: Plame-Rove church connection

Who is online